Chapel Hill ranks last in parks. We need to start preserving green space.
We like to think of Chapel Hill as a green community, but the data say otherwise.
A respected national organization, The Trust for Public Land, has compared green space and parks in cities and towns across America on its website. There, one can easily compare Chapel Hill against our closest neighbors of Raleigh, Durham and Greensboro. The tool takes into account the size of each municipality and population.
Unfortunately, Chapel Hill comes out dead last in every category compared to our neighbors. We are rock bottom in our region in percent of town land used for parks, percent of low-income residents near a park, and percent of our total population within a 10-minute walk of a park.
Why? Chapel Hill’s town parks are too small and are too far away from residents and are inequitably placed.
Trust for Public Land data shows that Raleigh ranks first regionally when it comes to percentage of town/city land used for parks and recreation (15%), while Chapel Hill ranks last at 3%. Another example: 63% of Raleigh’s low-income residents and 64% of Greensboro’s live near a park. In Chapel Hill it’s 39%.
Chapel Hill would need to preserve both 80% (about 130 of the 164 acres) of the Greene Tract Forest and all of the proposed Legion Park to not be last among the list of our neighbors in percentage of land dedicated to preservation and parks.
In addition, The Trust for Public Land designates the areas around both Legion Park and the Greene Tract Forest as high priority areas for a park since they are near many lower income residents and other residents who have no other nearby park. And, with 3% of our land dedicated for parks, we are far behind the Trust’s recommendation of 15%.
We often get fooled into thinking we have more park space than we actually have in town with so much undeveloped property owned by UNC and Duke universities — and this has clearly distorted our park planning.
Remember that property owned by these institutions cannot be counted on for public access and much can — and will — ultimately be developed. For example, Duke routinely closes large portions of its forest property for months for deer hunting activities.
Can you imagine the outcry if Chapel Hill closed Cedar Falls Park or Pritchard Park for a months-long deer hunt?
Ownership by either of these great institutions doesn’t necessarily guarantee access. A public battle over development of a significant 27-acre natural heritage site near Chapel Hill, Meadow Flats, was recently waged over the issue of preserving this amazing, unique environment at Old N.C. 86 and Eubanks Road near the Duke Forest. Duke moved in and bought the property, and then as the new land owner prohibited public access.
Closer to town, there have been multiple plans over the years by UNC to develop the Carolina North woods and these plans go far beyond the old airport site. Indeed, UNC sees its outlying parcels like Carolina North as land that “present(s) redevelopment capacity that plays an important role in meeting long-term University needs.”
The bottom line is that these university-owned properties are not parks or public open spaces — no matter what current use the public enjoys — and shouldn’t be counted as such in our planning.
If UNC or Duke wants to donate substantial tracts of land to the Town of Chapel Hill for permanent preservation that is a different matter. But these institutions have other responsibilities. And right now, Chapel Hill is way behind our neighbors in how many parks we have available to residents. That’s why we need to work to preserve our own town parks and open spaces — both now and for future generations.